ArticleEnvironmental science and pollution research international2015
Evaluation of the hazard potentials of river suspended particulate matter and floodplain soils in the Rhine basin using chemical analysis and in vitro bioassays.
Article in Environmental science and pollution research international, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Concentrations, sources, and exposure risk of polychlorinated biphenyls in soil profiles of the floodplain of the lower reaches of the River Niger, Nigeria.Environmental monitoring and assessment · 2021Article
- Embryo/larval toxicity and transcriptional effects in zebrafish (Danio rerio) exposed to endocrine active riverbed sediments.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2020Article
- Reviewing the relevance of dioxin and PCB sources for food from animal origin and the need for their inventory, control and management.Environmental sciences Europe · 2018Review
- Rapid in situ toxicity testing with luminescent bacteria Photorhabdus luminescens and Vibrio fischeri adapted to a small portable luminometer.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The purpose of the present study was to assess the hazard potentials of contaminated suspended particulate matter (SPM) sampled during a flood event for floodplain soils using in vitro bioassays and chemical analysis. Sediment-contact tests were performed to evaluate the direct exposure of organisms to native soils and SPM at two different trophic levels. For comparison, acetonic extracts were tested using both contact tests and additionally two cell-based biotests for cytotoxicity and Ah receptor-mediated activity (EROD-Assay). The sediment-contact tests were carried out with the dehydrogenase assay with Arthrobacter globiformis and the fish embryo assay with Danio rerio. The results of this study clearly document that native samples may well be significantly more effective than corresponding extracts in the bacteria contact assay or the fish embryo test. These results question the commonly accepted concept that acetonic extracts are likely to overestimate the toxicity of soil and SPM samples. Likewise, the priority organic compounds analyzed failed to fully explain the toxic potential of the samples. The outcomes of this study revealed the insufficient knowledge regarding the relationship between the different exposure pathways. Finally, there is concern about adverse effects by settling suspended particulate matter and remobilized sediments in frequently inundated floodplain soils due to an increase of the hazard potential, if compared with infrequently inundated floodplain soils. We showed that the settling of SPM and sediments revealed a significant impact on the dioxin-like potencies of riparian soils.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.